With all of the news on the protests and the moronic progressives talking about defunding their police departments to prove THEY CARE it’s easy to forget that we are supposedly still kinda sorta locked down across the country because of a virus that is apparently smart enough to only infect people who AREN’T protesting racism or something.
You know, we’ve been covering politics and culture in this country for a long time (four years EXACTLY today for this editor), and we’ve got to say HOOBOY, this has been the dumbest time in our history, maybe ever.
Brit Hume seems to agree with us because he has been front and center sharing amazing threads and information this entire time calling out the ‘experts’ on ‘the virus’.
DA-DA-DAAAAAAA.
And this one he shared earlier today is no exception:
Thread. Another BS study. https://t.co/LNcybEpRmg
— Brit Hume (@brithume) June 8, 2020
Yup, it’s from Alex ‘Screw Your Lockdown’ Berenson … and this one’s a doozy:
Wow. @nature published a paper claiming that lockdowns cut the spread of #COVID-19 by hundreds of millions of cases. The @Washingtonpost (inevitably) lapped it up. A look at the paper reveals it is more full of holes than the mask I have (not) worn all week. Let’s discuss… pic.twitter.com/aRUXN993N6
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) June 8, 2020
Another day, another useless study.
WaPo is such a joke.
Keep going:
Okay, so your first clue this is bunkum is on THE VERY FIRST PAGE: Note when the paper was received. Yep, March 22, basically before the epidemic had EVEN begun in the United States or social distancing had been in place for very long anywhere else. pic.twitter.com/EJVcT0JGB2
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) June 8, 2020
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
Holy crap.
In other words, this is really a paper about China (as the authors basically admit – they say on page 2 that they lack “sufficient data” for detailed estimates of changes over time in any other country).
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) June 8, 2020
CHY-NA.
Further, the authors make NO effort to compare the #COVID spread in countries that DID use lockdowns with those that didn’t… they merely track the infection rate by day and assume any changes resulted from lockdowns (note to @ft – I got your tautology right here)…
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) June 8, 2020
Because states that didn’t lockdown didn’t EXPLODE or end because of the virus.
Unlike New York which DID lockdown.
But without comparing countries that DIDN’T lock down to those that did, they have no way of knowing if the decrease from the early rapid spread simple represents the natural and normal track of the virus…
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) June 8, 2020
But Fauci! Birx! Masks! Social distancing! WASH YOUR HANDS FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THAT’S HOLY.
And further, their own analysis shows that lockdowns reduced the speed of spread by less than 40% everywhere (about 30% in the US) – meaning spread was still very rapid post-lockdown. Even worse, when they look at individual policies in the United States… pic.twitter.com/vCqw61HJXV
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) June 8, 2020
Oops.
They find almost no correlation between individual lockdown policies and ANY meaningful change in growth (to get around this little problem they create two catch-all categories called “other social distance” and “home isolation” which supposedly produce results.) pic.twitter.com/Q3rbq7e8xu
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) June 8, 2020
Gosh, we’re shocked.
There’s some other stuff too but I think the point is made. I cannot believe @nature – one of the world’s most prestigious journals – published this junk. Then again after the @nejm @thelancet HCQ fiasco maybe I can.
— Alex Berenson (@AlexBerenson) June 8, 2020
Ok, the COVID lockdown joke is over now, right? RIGHT?!
***
Related:
Join the conversation as a VIP Member